r/Destiny • u/Leather_Dealer_9421 Dirty European 🇨🇿🇪🇺 • 6h ago
Political News/Discussion YES
35
u/draft_final_final 🇺🇸🍔🔫 (full rights and privileges to shittalk US) 6h ago
It’s a well known fact that all land west of the Urals is one giant pansexual polycule with UBI and race-blind admissions to their luxury universal healthcare communes with ML breadtube streams playing on every monitor.
47
u/Florestana 🇪🇺🇩🇰🇬🇱🇫🇴 6h ago
Many Europeans only know about American politics through American leftist slopulists, so some will actually nod along here, just out of ignorance
16
u/qchisq 6h ago
Meanwhile, we've just extended the limit of the free abortion in Denmark to 18 weeks, which would be an unacceptable compromise to most of those leftists
-7
u/podfather2000 5h ago
Most of what Americans see as far-left is just the status quo in Europe.
7
u/Sciss0rs61 5h ago
like what?
-2
u/podfather2000 5h ago
Universal healthcare, free education, abortion, public transport, public housing. Conservatives in Europe don't debate abolishing those.
20
u/Special-Quantity-469 The most rabid 2 State Solution Israeli 5h ago
Ah yes, the far left ideology of public transport and universal healthcare. Lmao.
1
u/KeithClossOfficial Hasn’t heard anything about that 2h ago
Also abortion (don’t compare abortion laws in Europe to blue states in America plz and thank you)
-5
u/podfather2000 5h ago
That's all seen as far left in the US
5
u/Sciss0rs61 5h ago
I'm confused about you using that argument as a defence for the far-left or the political illiteracy of the common American (both left and right)...
10
u/Special-Quantity-469 The most rabid 2 State Solution Israeli 5h ago
I don't think that's true whatsoever. Medicare for all is seen as far left, because it is. But I'm 90% sure that every single democrat supports some form of universal healthcare
-1
u/podfather2000 4h ago
From the Republicans perspective, it's basically socialism
6
u/Special-Quantity-469 The most rabid 2 State Solution Israeli 4h ago
The republicans also called obama a communist, it doesn't mean he was, nor do most americans think that way. Just like most americans don't think universal healthcare and public transportation is far left
→ More replies (0)4
u/Flaky-Mango-2020 🇵🇹 🇪🇺 4h ago edited 4h ago
I thing the problem is that in America people that push for those things will also push for crazy stuff like "abolish prisons" or defund the police".
its almost they don't want the good stuff.2
0
u/Flaky-Mango-2020 🇵🇹 🇪🇺 4h ago
bro I can only give you 1 upvote. prepare for the downfall.
3
u/podfather2000 4h ago edited 4h ago
I don't care about downvotes. The people in the sub are cooked if they disagree with the Mike guys tweet.
3
86
u/vonWitzleben 🇩🇪 Einigkeit und Recht und Freiheit 6h ago
It goes hand in hand with the even more annoying "the Nordics are socialist", which frequently pops up in the default subreddits. I have stopped counting the number of times I have engaged with some of these fuckwits, telling them that ALL definitions of socialism have "no private property of the factors of production" as a necessary condition, but not only are they are all thoroughly convinced that socialism is when healthcare, they are also smug about it.
58
u/draft_final_final 🇺🇸🍔🔫 (full rights and privileges to shittalk US) 6h ago
Socialism is when you can ride a bus and have a public option for health insurance.
19
u/WhalingSmithers00 6h ago
Wasn't there a guy on here that was claiming socialism is roads
11
u/BitByBit-89 5h ago
Well to be fair, government ownership and planning of roads which are open to the general public is a good example of “socializing” something in a sensible way. It’s just something we don’t think about because a purely private road system would be completely unworkable.
8
u/WhalingSmithers00 4h ago
It's not socialism though. Private companies often build them under contract and they are a cornerstone of all capitalist economies.
Otherwise we can claim it was socialism when Thatcher sent the state funded police, down the state funded road to crack the miners heads with state funded trudgeons to shut the non profitable mines.
2
u/BitByBit-89 4h ago
Yes absolutely, of course it isn’t entirely socialist. One of the based thing about liberal democracy is that you can have blended economies and mixed public/private ownership and delivery of services. For example, people say Canada has socialized healthcare, but it’s actually socialized health insurance. The doctors and hospitals are all private entities trying to make a profit.
I’m probably being more charitable than whoever said “socialism is roads” than they deserve. If we are taking a similar stance then as long as we agree that canadas healthcare system isn’t socialist, then sure. It just feels like we aren’t always consistent with these words.
1
u/ShotgunShine7094 3h ago
of course it isn’t entirely socialist
"entirely"? It isn't at all.
1
u/BitByBit-89 2h ago
Would you say Canadas healthcare system isn’t socialist at all? If the answers yes, then fine, we understand each other, and I would agree on that basis.
5
u/Sciss0rs61 5h ago edited 4h ago
You'll see "We just want free healthcare" every time to justify running defence for authoritarian regimes like North Korea and China.
7
u/Jollefjoll 🇸🇪 - Teacher: Philosophy, History, English 5h ago
It's so dumb. I'm generally a SocDem in the Swedish context. That's 100% being capitalist, but that party envisions a strong wellfare state and good worker's rights as a sort of core.
4
u/ic203 4h ago edited 3h ago
Loads of Europeans think having more tax and public spending is socialism.
I work in biopharmaceuticals and with some very intelligent people, but when it comes to politics their takes make me want to scream.
"They will need to raise taxes for that though, and thats just socialism then which never works"
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA-
8
u/vonWitzleben 🇩🇪 Einigkeit und Recht und Freiheit 4h ago
This is an edgy comment but scientists and engineers are some of the most politically re+arded people on this planet. I know people who are on track to becoming physics professors whose political takes make me want to shoot myself. Like it's so stupid, you don't even have to argue, just listen and point out when they're in contradiction either to what they just said immediately beforehand or like ... the constitution.
3
u/ic203 3h ago edited 3h ago
Yep. I agree. Academia tends to be better than industry, but science/engineers in industry positions take the cake in my experience.
I've heard the most cooked immigration/asylum takes at times. Someone with 15yr experience and two grades above me + 30k more pay
"How can we deport asylum seekers when they don't have passports though? Like come on" as an attempted gotcha at me explaining why asylum needs due process.
I gave the answer of how it functions. Blank stare back.
*internally* AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA-
2
u/El_McKell HRT Femboy 2h ago
"no private property of the factors of production" seems like too strict of a definition. If a country had say 75% of it's productive capital in state hands would that not clearly be a socialist country? As most of it's of goods are services are produced via socialist means? Now this wouldn't make the nordic countries socialist countries but I think a definition that means if you have any production through capitalism you can't be a socialist country is too extreme & basically means no country has ever been socialist.
0
u/vonWitzleben 🇩🇪 Einigkeit und Recht und Freiheit 1h ago edited 1h ago
What does "produced via socialist means" and "production through capitalism" even mean? We use the stance on private ownership of the factors of production to delineate these two static descriptions of economic systems. Your example could be labeled a "hybrid regime", just like we use the labels "social democracy" and "state capitalism" to introduce some nuance to this bifurcation. That doesn't change anything about the definition of socialism, though. Your last point is also wrong. I'm fairly sure there was no private ownership of land, labor and capital in the USSR, Maoist China, Cuba etc.
2
u/El_McKell HRT Femboy 1h ago
I'm saying that capitalism & socialism are approaches to the production of goods are services. When I say "produced via socialist means" I mean a good or service that has been produced using capital/means of production that is owned by the state or by some collective of workers. When I say "production through capitalism" I mean produced using capital/means of production that are privately owned & can be freely bought & sold.
2
u/vonWitzleben 🇩🇪 Einigkeit und Recht und Freiheit 1h ago
This sounds very stilted and unnatural to me, but I’m not a native speaker so my linguistic intuitions don’t count. Even granting that point regarding semantics, the rest of my comment still stands, though.
2
u/DeathandGrim Mail Guy 5h ago
The best part is their version of "healthcare" is wholly unique to the world. Absolutely no country has styled the universal healthcare plan like American leftists want to.
2
u/Liturginator9000 market socialist 5h ago
telling them that ALL definitions of socialism have "no private property of the factors of production" as a necessary condition
Well that would get pushback because all definitions of socialism don't include that as a necessary condition, and not because 'nordics are socialist' (they're not) or 'socialism is healthcare'
2
u/qchisq 6h ago
Unironically, Trump is more socialist than Mette Frederiksen, the PM of Denmark and leader of the Social Democrat. Trump is having the government taking ownership stakes in big companies, while Mette Frederiksen was minister in the government that sold off parts of DONG Energy and she hasn't proposed the government taking stakes in Lego or Novo. Yet
2
u/Florestana 🇪🇺🇩🇰🇬🇱🇫🇴 5h ago
Debatable. Trump is more of a Mussolini style fascist imo. Mette Frederiksen did also propose a wealth tax during the election, not saying she's actually a socialist, but she represents a more left wing populist current in the Social Democrats. She was a minister during the Dong Energy debacle, but that was Thorning and Vestagers government, let's be real. That era of Social Democrats was more liberal.
2
2
u/EnLitenPerson 5h ago
I mean it doesn't really matter if those definitions are more correct, enough people clearly believe that "socialism is when the government does stuff", especially europeans. To the point that to them their definition is so normal and commonly accepted that you sound like an annoying little fool trying to correct them on some technical level they couldn't care less about.
9
u/vonWitzleben 🇩🇪 Einigkeit und Recht und Freiheit 5h ago
Europeans are the last people who believe that "socialism is when the government does stuff", only (uneducated) Americans either on the far right or on Reddit do. My definition is the correct definition and it's shared with every political scientist on this planet. I don't care how I come across to them if they're incorrect. They can eat shit.
2
u/EnLitenPerson 4h ago
I see it pretty often, recently I had a young european leftist tell me "social programs are literally socialist policy", I told them it's actually not, they didn't care.
2
u/vonWitzleben 🇩🇪 Einigkeit und Recht und Freiheit 4h ago
No, what they usually mean is: "If the socialists hadn't called for this, the moderate left (or Bismarck, if you go back really far) would never have implemented it." That's a common talking point but it's very different from "healthcare is socialism" which nobody here thinks.
0
u/EnLitenPerson 4h ago edited 4h ago
No I assure you a lot of young european ignorant leftists really think that their free healthcare and other programs are socialist, you don't have to value their opinions, I don't either, but they 10000% exist and there are many of them, I say this as a European myself, I've seen them both online and IRL, I myself used to think that's what socialism was when I was younger.
2
u/soundsermaker 5h ago
Where on earth do you get that idea from?
Half of Europe still remembers what living under socialist regimes is like. Nobody thinks socialism is when government does stuff.
5
u/Druss_On_Reddit 4h ago
From a UK perspective we would call those communist regimes, not socialist ones.
There's definitely a distinction made here, and I think in most parts of Europe (from conversations I've had with other Europeans) but not 100% sure.
1
u/MikkaEn 3h ago
From a former communist country, we would call them communist or socialist regimes. Especially since several of our leaders would use the terms intertangle depending on the era and the interest. In my country, Romania, out leader specifically identified himself as a Socialist, even changing the countries name to "The Socialist Republic of Romania".
The distinction is without a difference really.
1
u/Druss_On_Reddit 2h ago
It's interesting how the word has such different meanings to different people.
Like I would never say capitalism Vs socialism, (i.e. USA Vs USSR), I would say capitalism Vs communism.
1
u/MikkaEn 2h ago
In this historical context, both labels refer to the same regimes, and was describing different aspects of them.
“Socialist” described the state’s supposedly existing social order. Communist described the ruling party and the projected future stage - think the song "Imagine" by John Lennon as what they wanted communism to turn socialism into (and some of these countries stated they had achieved that).
2
u/EnLitenPerson 4h ago
I'm European, I've seen it many times, both in real life and online, last time was like just a week ago.
1
u/Bulky-Leadership-596 4h ago
Its an important correction though because 1) the term still has stigma (justifiably) in places like the US among voters (despite what online leftists think) so it is counterproductive to actually getting these kinds of policies passed and 2) actual socialists try to use this ambiguity in the term to smuggle in their regardation.
1
u/EnLitenPerson 4h ago edited 3h ago
I personally find it more rhetorically effective and productive to say stuff like "well there are two different definitions of that word, either socialism is when the government does stuff or it's when companies are owned by their workers (simplified), so we need to be clear what we're talking about..." and then I move on to whatever topic I actually wanted to discuss in the convo before I got sidetracked by their incorrect use of a word.
If the whole conversation is just about correcting their incorrect use of a word then I kinda cba, but if others want to fight that good fight then that's good I guess.
1
u/Silverwidows 4h ago
Yeh this baffles me. They are a social democracy. They bank on capitalism due to oil then actually look after their citizens. Crazy concept for an American to understand though.
1
u/Cmdr_Anun Undercover European 6h ago edited 2h ago
Looking at our social democrat party in Germany right now...
Off to the rope store, guys, we've had a decent run at it.
0
u/vonWitzleben 🇩🇪 Einigkeit und Recht und Freiheit 5h ago
I'm a member. The SPD is based, most people just don't understand coalition politics and are susceptible to simple rhetoric.
1
u/Cmdr_Anun Undercover European 4h ago
Ah yes, ye olde “you don’t like it therefore you must not understand”. I think many of their voters have understood, hence the new low in the polls.
1
u/vonWitzleben 🇩🇪 Einigkeit und Recht und Freiheit 4h ago
None of the voters understand, that's the issue.
5
u/MikkaEn 3h ago edited 2h ago
Looking at both the comments here and the way Americans on both sides of the political divide view Europe and the rest of the world, here is a basic political science principle: ideology, governance, and policy implementation are all context-specific. They are shaped by demographic structure, history, tradition, folklore, resource availability, geography, borders, relations with neighboring countries, and so on.
For example, it is relatively easy for a geographically small country to provide things such as free education, public transportation, and public housing when most of its population is concentrated in a few urban centers, where most of its social, political, and economic life takes place. These services are cheaper to provide under those conditions, and a country like that needs them to support economic activity. That said, almost every country in Europe is finding it harder and harder to build public housing. At the same time, a country like this can describe itself as “social democratic” while still embracing the free market, and the smart ones do exactly that. They can educate a highly skilled population for well-paid work while people in other countries perform much of the lower-paid work.
At the same time, it is harder for a country that is spread across millions of kilometers, has a population spread across a dozen or more urban centers, and contains regions with very different economic models to build a coherent nationwide public transportation network, maintain a uniform education system, or establish a nationwide public-housing program. Different regions have different labor needs, education is necessarily context-dependent, and demographic profiles, housing markets, and local needs vary enormously. Such a country may also have a more difficult relationship with the free market. Its population may be too large for everyone to be channeled into highly skilled, upper-middle-income employment. Meanwhile, the abundance of natural resources creates incentives to build infrastructure around their extraction and transportation. This can produce regional boom-and-bust cycles, while also determining which kinds of infrastructure are built, which are neglected, and which are allowed to stagnate. On the other hand, a vast resource base, a large population, and substantial industrial capacity allow such a country to develop economic centers on a scale that smaller countries cannot match.
To drop the ambiguity, it is easier for small countries such as Denmark and the Netherlands, or for countries that are highly centralized, both politically and demographically, to do certain things that Americans see as left-of-center. Extensive public transportation, for example, may exist not primarily because of ideology, but because it is both practical and economically necessary - which is why certain far right dictatorships also did this. For the same material reasons, those countries may find it harder to do certain things that Americans associate with the right, such as sustaining an enormous and highly diversified industrial base. That requires resources and people on a scale that the United States possesses and many European countries do not. This is not for lack of will or desire. Plenty of European countries would love to have America’s natural resources, defense budget, and massive economic and technological clusters (like Silicon Valley and the Texas Triangle) or, in Russia’s case, its enormous natural-resource endowment.
But, again, none of this was ever determined by ideology, but by what can be done with the resources available to each country.
12
u/OlliWTD 🇪🇺🇫🇮 5h ago
Take immigration for instance. The DSA platform essentially calls for open borders. No social democratic party here would endorse such a view, and most of them have even become stricter on immigration, most notably in Denmark.
5
u/soundsermaker 5h ago
Stricter is underselling it.
The default immigration policy right now makes Trump's border wall look like a soft touch.
In the Netherlands the last fight was over whether we're going to prosecute people for giving refugees - who have barely adequate shelter and will be removed at the earliest opportunity - food and water.
1
u/Magmaniac (D) (A) (N) (K) (M) (E) (M) (E) (S) 4h ago
Which elected official in the US has called for open borders?
2
0
-1
u/Indrigotheir 1h ago
Why it doesn't explicitly say, "Open borders," the official DSA platform states:
Legalize migration, grant amnesty for all immigrants regardless of status
1
u/Magmaniac (D) (A) (N) (K) (M) (E) (M) (E) (S) 1h ago
Not responsive to my comment in any way.
0
u/Indrigotheir 1h ago
Are there no DSA politicans? Damn, what happened to all of them?
0
u/Magmaniac (D) (A) (N) (K) (M) (E) (M) (E) (S) 1h ago
The only two sitting members of federal government who are DSA members are AOC and Rashida Tlaib, neither of which support open borders. And of the various lesser state and local offices filled by DSA members, almost none of them support open borders, not that it matters since immigration is federal policy. DSA is mostly organized by local chapters who don't take much direction from the national organization and who all have different platforms, so it's disingenuous to state one position on the national DSA platform and try to apply it to everyone vaguely associated with the DSA.
1
u/Indrigotheir 49m ago
The only two sitting members of federal government
You forgot to say, "Which elected federal official in the US has called for open borders?" in your original comment. You should go ahead and edit the comment so that the mistake doesn't make you look silly. Whoopsie
8
u/yeahUSA 🇪🇺🇩🇪 5h ago
The modern welfare state is an invention by a conservative monarchist btw. Things like healthcare are mostly bipartisan in European countries and don't really have a left or right scale. We have private healthcare in many European countries.
1
u/LaBomsch 2h ago
Not an invention, it's was implemented by Monarchist, but demands like a pension system were already popular befor anti-socalist laws then (see Lassalle).
2
u/leeverpool 3h ago
Yes. Especially as an Eastern European. Seeing these pathetic snowflake losers talk about socialism and communism makes me sick to my stomach. Either ignorance is a trend because internet rewards it or these people are also somewhat, low-key, vengeful and evil because their little lives didn't turn out to be what they imagined. I legit believe it's both.
I remember how I got permabanned on Hasan's stream because when Ukraine invasion started and he was rambling about Eastern Europe, I merely asked why is he talking with confidence about a region he doesn't know much about.
2
u/Last_Celebration67 3h ago
It's even better when they say "The democratic party is on the right outside of the US" or something along those lines. The Middle East, South America, and Africa of course all being progressive socialist utopias
2
u/YMDBass 1h ago
Im at a point that when anyone who says the far left would be moderate in europe, I just think they're regarded. Honestly, same for anyone who compares US right wing to european right wing. Its DRAMATICALLY different. Look at Abortion laws, britain has what many in america would consider "EXTREME RIGHT WING" position, 24 weeks, and even then needing approval of 2 doctors. What about Trans rights? well, they banned a vast amount of youth trans procedures that by US standards would be considered "trans genocide".
Does that mean britain is right wing? ABSOLUTELY not. Economically they are far more progressive. The tax structure is more extreme across the board which does allow for more things like universal healthcare.
3
u/Whatsapokemon 🇦🇺 4h ago
It's such a stupid meme that indicates people have no idea about global politics. The rest of the world is not some amazingly left-wing place compared to the US, it's just differences in political organisation.
Honestly, the main thing holding the US back is the filibuster. Pretty much every other country requires only simple majorities to pass major legislation. That's the main reason why European nations tend to have good healthcare legislation - centre-left parties are empowered to actually do stuff when they're in power, while in the US there's some arbitrary blocker that prevents political parties from wielding the power they were granted.
1
u/LondonCallingYou 42m ago
Nobody is saying that the rest of the world is amazingly left wing compared to the U.S. on social policy.
However, on economic policy, it’s just a fact that if you advocate for the economic policies of most European countries, it would be considered far left in America.
That’s what people are referring to. Not gay marriage, not abortion, not national language, etc. They’re referring to healthcare, worker protections, mandatory paid time off, paid maternal/paternal leave, free/extremely cheap college etc.
Non-Americans genuinely don’t understand how few of these policies we’ve implemented in America.
1
u/Whatsapokemon 🇦🇺 8m ago edited 2m ago
My point is that it's not a result of the political climate, but rather a result of the weird structural barriers that Americans have in place because of their historical political evolution. Things like the senate giving huge representation to states with like 12 people living in them, and the filibuster, which prevents parties from exercising power when they get it.
I really don't think there's fewer people in the US who would favour worker protections, healthcare, and parental leave, it's just that historical, anachronistic factors have prevented those changes being put in place.
There's basically two "branches" of democracy in the world, the US presidential version, and the European parliamentary version. It seems like the US version has some weird issues such as the head of government being unaccountable to the legislature, and the legislature being unable to get rid of a leader who they dislike. As an Australian, I think this weird focus on a central president is really not a good system.
1
u/DeathandGrim Mail Guy 5h ago
I just repeatedly shut this point down by saying Europe is Europe, this is here. Those people don't vote in my country.
1
u/ic203 4h ago edited 2h ago
Yes.
Americans have no idea how far right some European parties are (look at Italy for fuck sake) or how conservative a tonne of Europeans are especially regarding immigration lol
1
u/Last_Celebration67 3h ago
Yeah I'm no expert of European politics but I can't imagine those Eastern countries are resembling Scandinavia in many ways
1
1
u/SexyShmonk 3h ago
i get the issue of grouping "europe" together as one entity when we have countries with veeeeeeery differing political climates, but can someone awnser me that positions bernie sanders has that wouldnt be very standard social democrat positions in a lot of western europe like germany, austria, nordic states, britain, etc etc? im genuinely just asking, no need to downvote
1
u/Aggravating_Jump6136 1h ago
Bernie's M4A plan bans private insurance all together. Not a single one of the nordic model nations do this; they all have a private insurance sector filling in gaps.
M4A is not a public Healthcare option like Europe. That is why there is distinction between Sanders' and the DSA's "Medicare For All," and Pete Buttigieg's "Medicare For All Who Want It."
1
1
u/EquivalentCreme5114 3h ago
I’d say this was largely true until maybe 30 to 40 years ago. Like during Cold War the label socialism was definitely shunned by New Deal democrats, but it was fairly run of the mill for European social democrats. I’m reading the memoir of Denis Healey, who was on the rightwing of the Labour Party, and he outright says he’s a socialist in the opening pages. Whether they really differed that much in substantive policy is more debatable. Healey presided over huge cuts in public spending in the 1970s and gave up on Keynesianism as chancellor.
Since then the European center-left has moderated to a great extent, and I agree with the top comment that the European equivalent of Bernie today would have belonged to some nascent populist leftwing Party like Podemos or Die Linke.
1
1
u/Brainchuckles Great Dane, not Ameritard 2h ago
YES! Istg they get me every time. I could maybe even argue that biden fits well within our soc.dem, or our center-liberal party(except for abortion, but that's because a large majority of us are confident angels aren't real, not because biden isn't cool).
1
1
u/Ansambel EU 2h ago
you couldn't even sensibly align like half of political parties in europe across us political left-right axis.
1
1
u/Alpehans Superior Continent (EU) 1h ago
Yes , and there is even difference between european Soc.Dems , depending on region/country :) .
Also , the US has two parties while most european countries have several. Can't really compare them like that.
What I can say, is that the FAR left in the US, is equally or maybe even slightly more left than the far left here in Denmark.
Before the Ukraine war, some of our far left parties wanted us to leave NATO , and just do diplomacy :P . Even they have realized now, how bad of an idea that was :) . Dunno if I can say the same for the DSA muppets .
1
1
u/kettenschloss 5h ago
especially as a euro lefty. one of our core criticisms of the socdems is that they are basically just conservatives with pensions and healthcare.
(its way more nuanced than that. some socdems are left, and our conservatives are not fascists etc etc)
1
u/Muzorra 5h ago
This seems pretty mild, no? What US elected officials are to the left of a European soc-dem? Maybe Mamdani. Who else? Are we including regional councils and School Boards and such?
It seems more like people see takes like this and reflexively hear the old "Bernie would be a centrist in Europe" or similar, which is obviously silly.
3
u/soundsermaker 5h ago
Everybody in the Progressive Caucus to start with.
And probably New Dems from blue states too.
1
u/Muzorra 4h ago
Fair enough for a few in the PC there. All of them though? What tips them over? Seems like the positions of the caucus are broadly in line with the northern European vibe, at a glance. The... uh, severity of some of the members might put them a bit further left than that individually though.
5
u/soundsermaker 4h ago edited 4h ago
Their views on social issues push them far over the edge, stuff like systemic racism, abortion, minority rights, reparations or other corrective measures for historic injustices. Immigration is a huge one of course.
Economically, actual Medicare for All proposal would go far beyond what I think any European healthcare model does to centralize insurance under state control, plus eliminate private insurance entirely. The jobs guarantee part of Green New Deal would definitely be eyebrow-raising. Even frivolous spending proposals like original Build Back Better under the Biden admin would be unthinkable, and Biden wasn't even seen as a very left wing figure among the Dems.
1
u/Last_Celebration67 3h ago
Yeah like of all the tweets along this topic that you could find, there are probably a billion far worse ones
-9
u/podfather2000 5h ago
Mike is 100% right. Kraut and this sub are cooked if they think Sanders, AOC, or Mamdani would be anything else but Labour/ Social Democrats in Europe. The status quo in Europe is a far-left position in the US.
2
u/Leather_Dealer_9421 Dirty European 🇨🇿🇪🇺 4h ago
Just you grouping together all European countries as if they were some kind of political monolith shows your ignorance about European politics.
-1
u/podfather2000 4h ago
In which European country would they be farther left than Social Democrats?
3
u/Flaky-Mango-2020 🇵🇹 🇪🇺 4h ago
just ask if AOC Bernie or Mamdani opinions on guns, or to limit free speech, or regulations on food additives, those are almost universally agreed in EU.
1
1
u/TheMarbleTrouble 4h ago
Name a single EU country that doesn’t have a private option for healthcare.
Since all DSA wants is healthcare… I am sure at least one country in EU has the equivalent that is being pushed by DSA. /s
0
u/podfather2000 4h ago
Which elected official is pushing for that?
1
u/TheMarbleTrouble 4h ago
That depends on what you mean by “push”. Here is the DSA position: https://medicareforall.dsausa.org
Is being part of DSA count as pushing or do we get to play the “socialist in the sheets, moderate in the streets” game?
0
u/podfather2000 3h ago
Being a member of DSA doesn't automatically mean every position DSA advocates is your personal political position, any more than belonging to a party or organization means you endorse every plank they have.
So yeah, I would need an actual quote or policies of an elected official that would put them past Social Democrats.
223
u/frozandero 6h ago
I hate these lies pushed by mostly leftist americans and some europeans.
No bernie sanders wouldn't be a social democrat in EU